Am Sonntag 06 Mai 2007 18:29 schrieb Arnulf Wiedemann: > Am Sonntag 06 Mai 2007 17:12 schrieb Dmitri Hrapof: > > Arnulf Wiedemann <arnulf <at> wiedemann-pri.de> writes: > > > So please let me know if there is some interest in that implementation > > > and if yes, who would like to spend also some time on the project, as I > > > am currently working on an other open source project for TCL and don't > > > have too much time for the urp project. > > > > Yes, I would like to participate in that implementation. Right now I'm > > loading Python library into Common Lisp and talking to OO through PyUNO, > > which is rather strange :) > > My first trying was also using that approach, but then I found out there > were some problems using pyuno, which did not deliver enough information > necessary for TCL. > > > And embedding CL into OO, though a noble task, > > seems like too much of work at the moment. > > You are welcome! > > I just digged into that directory (the first time after about a year). The > current implementation has about 12.000 lines of code, of which there are > about 6.500 lines of code related to implement TCL functionality in C, for > example hash list which you can traverse using a "foreach" to handle every > entry in the hash list or handling of TCL like lists, which is similar to > having an argv in C to pass information. That part is not necessary to be > understood, as it is "stolen" from Tcl and it is working, only the > interfaces are interesting. I also do not know most of the internals of > that part. I have used it because that way I can easily convert the > functionality written in TCL urp to run also in C. I think there is no > performance penality using that approach and it did save me a lot of > implementation time. > > The rest is (if I remember correctly) the "low" level functions to "speak" > to OO. It is doing all of the administration of all the "objects" etc. I > think right now I can send simple messages and get back some answers with > that. > > As the urp proctocol is not changing very much it is independent of the OO > version (>1.1.2) I know that from TCL urp (which has been tested with 1.1.2 > 1.1.4 and 2.0.x and 2.1.0). I am getting all the internals using > introspection functions and core reflection functions of OO, so there is > also no problem if there are new interfaces/classes etc. in newer versions. > > The idea is to hide also some of the low level functionality and have as a > wrapper interface already some "middle" level. > > I can provide a tar ball, if you are interested. At the moment there is > only an old state in cvs at sourceforge.net, but if I continue I will use > svn there. > sorry, forgot to say, all that is only tested and running on linux (SuSE 10.0 is my version). Arnulf > Regards, > Arnulf > > > Sincerely yours, > > Dmitri > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
